Zillow56 MCP Server

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Search for Lenders' implies a read-only operation, but it doesn't specify whether this is a filtered list, paginated results, or any rate limits. It misses details like what data is returned or how results are structured, which is critical for a search tool with no output schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise with just three words, 'Search for Lenders', which is front-loaded and wastes no space. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool name, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of a search tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the search returns, how results are filtered, or any behavioral traits. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand and use the tool effectively.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (location, lenderName, page) with descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining parameter interactions or search logic. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Search for Lenders' clearly states the verb ('Search') and resource ('Lenders'), providing a basic purpose. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'lenderdetails' or 'lenderreviews', nor does it specify what kind of search this is (e.g., by location, name, etc.). It's adequate but vague about scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'lenderdetails' or 'lenderreviews'. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as needing a location parameter, and doesn't mention any exclusions or typical use cases. This leaves the agent without direction on tool selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.